So, so very Essex. That'll so be on the next series of TOWIE or Geordie Shore.

Alternatively, and no-one has though of this angle yet - GREAT camouflage for artic / antarctic photograhy! You'll be able to sneak up on those polar bears and penguins and they won't see you as they'll all be looking for a black 1Dx

As I said, it is easy to spot and smell both types. In any thread they will inevitably praise or defend Canon, no matter what "silly and immature" products they just may have launched. Things like white/colored versions of low-specced products. Who would really want a black or white SL-1 complete with slapping mirror and a sorry tiny, "tunnel-vision" pentamirror viewfinder and only one dial for settings, when Canon could also offer us a really good and even smaller EOS-M2 with a decent EVF and AF-performance matching the SL-1 ... at a similar price of course, since it is cheaper to produce a mirrorless camera than a DSLR. Especially the SL-1, which is pitched directly at "compact-camera upgraders" who are not likely to already have an extensive collection of EF/L/ or EF-S glass? They'd be happy to start with even smaller EF-M lenses.

Oh dear. Well, I happen to own a 5DIII, a 6D and an Olympus OMD EM5, and briefly owned and disliked an M - and, despite that, I was curious enough to try an SL-1 when some online vendor was selling them new for c. $450 with 18-55 STM kit lens (I didn't, and still don't, want the kit lens, but it was cheaper to buy it with than without - go figure). The images it makes are as good as the M's, but it works much better and is ergonomically far preferable(for me, anyway) to an M, not just because it has a viewfinder (which may not be as good as a FF's viewfinder but hardly gets in the way) but because lenses balance better on it. One control wheel is enough when, as this does, the camera has excellent touch-screen controls. I'll probably keep it.

I dare say Canon could make an M that works as well (in some respects it should work better), but what makes you think that mirrorless = cheaper if it has a "decent" EVF attached? The current state of the art EVF, when sold separately, costs close to $300.

Silly and immature I can agree. However, he's made the statement twice, so it hardly counts as "heat of the moment", at least not the second time (once I could agree). One of the problems with the internet is that people say and "do" things they would never say or do in the "real world". Yet here he is complaining about "assorted canon fanboys on this forum" and behaving (at least) equally badly as those he trashes. People should be responsible for their words, own them, and defend them. If they can't, they should retract them. That goes for this poster and others, including those who hide behind a wink emoticon ( ) when insulting others.

"Silly and immature" ... now who is insulting others?

No need to get all riled up. Calling fanboys and paid lobbyists what they are is no insult in my book. Since I did not and will not name specific members, I certainly have not insulted any member here. If you ARE a paid lobbyist, then you should not feel insulted, but possibly ashamed if you consider this occupation to be a shameful one. If you are no paid lobbyist, well then we you were not meant, but you might want to ask yourself whether you qualify as an - unpaid - fanboy. Actually, I'd consider the latter to be somewhat less smart than being paid to sing Canon's praise.

As I said, it is easy to spot and smell both types. In any thread they will inevitably praise or defend Canon, no matter what "silly and immature" products they just may have launched. Things like white/colored versions of low-specced products. Who would really want a black or white SL-1 complete with slapping mirror and a sorry tiny, "tunnel-vision" pentamirror viewfinder and only one dial for settings, when Canon could also offer us a really good and even smaller EOS-M2 with a decent EVF and AF-performance matching the SL-1 ... at a similar price of course, since it is cheaper to produce a mirrorless camera than a DSLR. Especially the SL-1, which is pitched directly at "compact-camera upgraders" who are not likely to already have an extensive collection of EF/L/ or EF-S glass? They'd be happy to start with even smaller EF-M lenses. If Canon were to sell them all, where the buyers live. But I am sure some of you will be happy to defend these Canon business practices as "truly brilliant".

I will continue to bash Canon as long as they launch silly, immature and meaningless products and try to cheat their customers for their money with them, instead of devoting their resources to develop and manufacture products that truly help us to take (technically) better pictures and/or to get the pictures we want more easily and with a higher success rate.

First, show me where I have "[sung] Canon's praise". If by claiming that DR is not the be all and end all of photography, perhaps I have. I also pointed out that I used color reversal film (probably before you were conceived) and DR was extremely limited. I have great shots from my honeymoon in Ireland from 1993 with such limited DR. If, in saying that I don't feel horribly limited by current sensors (I'd like more DR but do not need more DR - I'd also like more resolution but do not need it) I am a "fanboy" I'll wear that badge with pride. Of course that would be your opinion, and you know what they say about opinions: "opinions are like assholes, everybody has one".

So now you not only dish out baseless accusations, but you evidently do not read well. I stated clearly that I am NOT a "paid lobbyist" so your "if [I am] ..." accuses me of perhaps lying. You state that "paid lobbyists" exist as fact, but refuse to name names or provide any verifiable proof. When pressed, you say you can, among other things, "smell both types". Does your computer or tablet or phone come with the ability to discern and then the emanate odors of those who post? If so, that's something I'd like to get, and feel Apple has really let me down with my current 2013 MBP.

As for "silly and immature" - I was merely quoting someone else's take of your posts. But again, you didn't read it, did you?

As for remedial reading, I suggest starting with McGuffey's Primer. It might help. Oh yes, *that* may be a bit of an insult. Perhaps I should leave a so as not to offend.

Logged

When people see you arguing with an idiot on the internet, all they see is two idiots arguing.

Unfortunately, as I live in Japan I had to buy a Kiss X4 as my first DSLR. I always referred to it as a T2i or 550D. Eventually had to man up and get a 7D!

I've never been one for taping a camera up but if I were to start it would be to hide that ridiculous name.

I always wondered about that name coz, I have many Japanese colleagues in my office and my immediate boss is Japanese (so were my 2 previous bosses before him) but none of them seem the kind who like such mushy/girly names .... but do the Japanese, in Japan, prefer "Kiss X" whatever instead of say 700D or 100D etc? (for that matter I don't get why the american versions are called "t5i" "sl1" etc (those names also sound a bi weird), I mean they have 5D, 7D, 70D etc and then suddenly the entry level DSLR's are named with strange robotic sounding names ... what's up with that!